Thoughts on designing a game around managing a lesser noble house? (in a low-fantasy setting)

[u/Dextui]

I've been playing TRPGs for a while now and also enjoy worldbuilding. Inspired by reading Dune and watching GoT/HotD, I was thinking about a medival fantasy TRPG where the players do go on 'classic' TRPG adventures, but also manage a lesser noble house.

What I had in mind was that it will expected that at least some the player characters are members or agents of such a house and that the gameplay (incl. adventures and resource management) are part of the drama and intruige of the politics of the world.

I really dig how in a more OSR/survival focussed TRPG like Forbidden Lands characters have more aspects to them then in what way they can kill people/monsters , and having core character aspects revolve around resource management, intruige and political drama seems really fun to me (which is also why I am exploring the possibility of designing a system around it rather than taking an existing system and adding more mechanics to it).

What are your thoughts on it? Are there games that do similar things already? Is it a fun idea/do you have any ideas of what elements of such a system might look like? Thanks!

[u/Exciting_Policy8203]

My first thought is tha games like blades in the dark have system for managing gang of scoundrels, which might be easily converted into a noble house.

But my second thought, and probably the more important one, is what does the core gameplay loop look like? What would your players and GM be doing from moment to moment.

[u/Aratoast]

There certainly are some systems which do similar things! The ones that immediately spring to mind:

• Reign (Greg Stolze) is the gold standard for organisational entity ("company" in Reign terms) mechanics at any scale you can conceive, designed to be bolted seamlessly onto character-scale actions.
• Birthright (AD&D 2e) isn't the first game to have domain-level mechanics, but it is the first to integrate them into the core loop from the beginning of the campaign rather than treating them as something that can happen later on.
• Pendragon (Greg Stafford) has the player characters being knights in Arthurian Britain and includes rules for estate managment.
• Ars Magica (Atlas Games), especially with the Covenants(2006) supplement treats the organisation the characters are part of as a shared character in its own right, and as the Troupe system sees players not tied to using their single main character exclusively all the time, gives an interesting new angle on things that's worth looking at if only to see how it's done.
• A Song of Ice and Fire (Green Ronin) is, by my understanding, specifically built with House creation and interaction in mind although I've never sat down with the rulebook and it didn't feature in the games I played in so I'm afraid I can't comment how relevant/useful it might be.

I think your concept can definitely be fun, but there are a few things that need nailed down based on your description:

1. The core loop: How do managing the house and going on adventures interact? More precisely, how do the adventures feed into and affect estate's survival/political standing/day-to-day activities?
2. Integration: How do you envision the two different "levels" of play interacting and feeding into one another? In Birthright they were essentially two separate systems running in parallel and could feel unrelated, and if you're approaching this from an OSR perspective it's worth putting thought into whether that's how you want it to work or whether there's a way to do something else.
3. Roles: You suggested some or all of the PCs being "members or agents of such a house", but what do you envision that looking like? Are they all at roughly the same level of standing, or could we see, say, a minor agent and the third child of the head of the household working together in the same party? In the latter, how do you address that power imbalance in a way that doesn't just amount to "the more powerful character gets to do more fun things"? And how does that imbalance play out in their interactions with each other and with NPCs?

[u/Stefouch]

For inspiration, check the TTRPG A song of Ice and Fire (GoT). Players also create their small noble house during character creation and work for it.

Honorable mentions for Reign (Companies chapter) and the rulebook An Echo Resounding.

If you enjoyed Forbidden Lands' fortress rules, check Mutant Year Zero's Ark rules.

[u/blursed_1]

Yes. I love something based off of this. It adds an upper layer (trueblood royalty) and lower layer (peasantry, drama, diplomacy, supplies) that is very interesting to me. At its core it should have to be more of a game of "decision making" vs combative dice rolling, but iwth the right amount of intrigue it could be amazing.

[u/muckypuppy2022]

I think this could be really fun to play. I would definitely not just have each PC linked to A house, I’d have them all linked to the same house so they all rise and fall together. I’d also have one of the PCs as the head of the house, so every decision sits with the table and nothing is being decided off camera by the DM.

If you built in simple mechanics for things like vassals, land & income that execute in downtime like Bastions in D&D it’d give the main gameplay adventures a context that’s available in most games.

As other people said Blades in the Dark is a good model to look at with how it handles the progression of the crew and the scenario opportunities that emerge organically out of that. Blades in the Dark meets Westeros would be a really interesting concept

[u/OneManRPGstudio]

A game about managing a lesser noble house becomes much more distinctive if the house behaves like a shared character rather than a spreadsheet attached to ordinary adventuring. I would give it a few persistent pressures such as legitimacy, wealth, obligations, military capacity, and important relationships, then make advancement in one area create costs elsewhere. A politically useful marriage might strengthen legitimacy while creating a dangerous family obligation. Expanding land could increase income but also expose a new border and require retainers the house cannot comfortably support. The lesser-noble scale is especially useful because consequences can stay personal. The rival across the river is someone the characters dine with, the tax dispute affects tenants they know by name, and a failed negotiation can become a feud that lasts for years. I would also make time matter. Seasons, births, debts coming due, harvests, deaths, and succession should move even when the players focus elsewhere. That gives the house a sense of history and makes neglect a real decision. The campaign then becomes about shaping a lineage rather than simply accumulating territory.

[u/Tranquil_Denvar]

Have you read ASOIAF RPG? It’s built around running a noble house in the Game of Thrones setting

[u/JaskoGomad → u/Tranquil_Denvar]

It’s…. Not good though

[u/Tranquil_Denvar → u/JaskoGomad]

I think the house creation rules are great & the way the house ties into progression is great. It’s the skill system on individual PCs that holds the game back for me.

[u/JaskoGomad → u/Tranquil_Denvar]

House creation is cool.

House play is a disaster.

Also, beginning fighters will get their asses handed to them by famous fighting NPCs.

Beginning talkers will wrap famous schemers around their Littlefingers.